I am coming across a lot of content regarding @dan's announcement that he is creating STEEM 2.0 and Bitshares 3.0. This sent reverberations throughout those communities. Of course, common to human nature, fear was the main driver of what was taking place.
Honestly, I have no idea what @dan is creating. Anything I write about it, like everyone else, is just speculation.
My conclusion is that @dan is not out to harm or destroy the other blockchains he created. Instead, he is going to produce something that will add value to them all. I draw this conclusion from reading what @dan wrote over the years and watching many interviews with him. Naturally, I could be completely wrong about this.
So, let us operate form the presumption that @dan is looking at this competitively and is out to destroy both STEEM and Bitshares. We will say that he has resentments against certain individuals in those communities, enough to drive him for total conquest.
There is no doubt @dan is a brilliant developer. He created the two blockchains that conducted the most transactions in the past year. With the introduction of EOS, it is safe to say that he will have the top 3 blockchains in that area very soon. Each blockchain provides the technical ability to really grow. It is one of the main reasons to be optimistic about STEEM.
The challenge is that we tend to make idols out of people. There is no doubt @dan is one of the biggest influences in this industry so far. That does not mean, however, he is perfect. From some of what I came across, @dan has made his share of mistakes. I write this, not to diminish what he accomplished, but, rather, to simply point out none of us succeed at everything we do.
Many attack @dan for his building stuff and moving on. This is unfair in my opinion for a simple reason. Most developers, inventors, and creators are lousy managers. They are adept at building things yet need to turn it over to others. Even ones who can excel at that, ala Steve Jobs, tend to be real bastards to deal with. I believe this is why it is so rare to see the creator end up steering the entity to maximum success.
That said, it really is of little importance in blockchain anyway. Blockchain is dependent upon the community that arises, not a particular leader. Bitcoin has succeeded without Satoshi even being known. The guy/girl/group disappearing not long after introduction yet that chain continued to grow.
STEEM and Bitshares both have established communities. Does that mean that @dan could not create the same? Of course not. However, we all must be careful of presuming the "if he builds it, they all will automatically will come". Surely there will be a lot of interest and, it might even be a better mousetrap. That does not equate to destruction of the other chains.
Another point to keep in mind is that anything @dan creates is open source. It is available to all. There is nothing that prevents STEEM or Bitshares from implementing anything that @dan does on their blockchains. If he does come out with something extremely revolutionary, then others are free to adopt it.
Being reared in a world where scarcity reigned supreme, it is easy for us to fall into the celebrity adoration mindset. It is a part of our culture, one that I think is meant to keep us looking outside ourselves. Bitcoin's success depends none on Satoshi since he exited the picture. The same could be true with STEEM and Bitshares regarding @dan. These blockchains were created by these individuals but the long term success is up to the people associated with them. It is the community and what they create on the blockchain that makes the difference.
I am very grateful to @dan for what he created. He is a very talented developer and through his efforts, my life, moving forward, is forever changed. I think that will be true for tens of millions of people down the road. Thus we cannot underestimate the impact that he is making. However, we need to be careful to keep our adoration in check and not put someone up on a pedestal.
This is just another lesson in focusing upon our own garden. Many on STEEM want to look at the accounts of others and how much they are making off a post instead of concentrating upon growing their own accounts. The same is true for blockchains. We can focus upon what other blockchains are doing in lieu of putting the efforts into the ones we are on. Quite frankly, the STEEM and Bitshares community need to tend to their own development and contributions while letting @dan go about his own business. If there is something to be implemented from his development, then do it. Outside of that, ignore it.
This is not a competition. That is scarcity world thinking. People are free to use multiple blockchains. We need to get out of this us versus them. People on STEEM can also post on whatever @dan creates if that is desired.
That said, the bottom line is this: STEEM will succeed or fail because of STEEM; the same is true for Bitshares.
The power is in those communities' hands. It is best for them not to forget that.
If you found this article informative, please give it an upvote and resteem
To receive the free basic income tokens you are entitled to and help end world wide poverty, please click the following:
Pictures by Google Images.
I think STEEM is in a good position to compete. But that being said, SMT's do need to work and solve some of the current issues. The head start that STEEM has with number of users is a huge advantage.
My outlook for bitshares is a bit more pessimistic. Many, many companies/blockchains are looking to compete in the DEX space. There will be fierce competition in the next few years.
That's interesting as I'm the opposite. I think Dan is working on STEEM 2.0 on EOS to fx the issues on current STEEM (whales) which means 1.0 could die a quick death. Bitshares community are already exploring EOS integration so Dan building something else could likely help
Forgot to say in the below interview it def sounds like he is developing new competing versions of STEEM and BTS, as he says ultimately people can decided which version to back
Well said
yes i think u r right .
I think @dan doesn't plan to harm steemit and the steem blockchaing because i remember in a interview that he was very happy that steemit was helping people in poor countries. I think this steem 2.0 will be an addition to a system or something completely new but not a competitor.
We can see it this way, every blockchain evolves as a different planet in the space. The community brings it to a different trajectory and grows with it.
This is the optimum beauty of a decentralized world!
We can see it this way, every blockchain evolves as a different planet in the space. The community brings it to a different trajectory and grows with it.
This is the optimum beauty of a decentralized world!
One idea that amused me is that Steemit users can immediately pounce on Steemit 2.0 and conduct something of a takeover of the platform.
There is a pre-established community here that could easily occupy both platforms, maybe with the same usernames (lol) and establish a dynamic on both platforms that make them symbiotic, rather than competitors. :)
@dan is a developer. Like you said, he's not meant to manage. He built it; now he needs to build something else. The future of Steem is in the communities hands so, let's make it grow :) Well said taskmaster, thank you
Very cool bro, I'm a big fan.
It's a whole new scene, we don't need "Cult of Personality" to recognize when a good idea is worth building on..
I feel like together, we have a place where we really can predict the future, and that's so amazing to me, I feel so blessed and thanks for being part of that.
Taskmaster again, I love what you do. The way you talked about the blockchain technology and the future. It was from you I first learned about the future world of abundance and it has changed my thinking totally.
well said.
Perhaps, I completely agree with you! Good luck to you and love.